ArticleJournal of robotic surgery2022
Recent progress of robotic head and neck surgery using a flexible single port robotic system.
Article in Journal of robotic surgery, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Thematic evolution and global trends in retroauricular and robotic-assisted surgery: a comprehensive bibliometric review.Journal of robotic surgery · 2025Review
- A technical feasibility study on adaptation of a microsurgical robotic system to an intraoperative complication management in dental implantology: perforated Schneiderian membrane repair using SymaniJournal of robotic surgery · 2023Article
- Structural Optimization Design of a Six-Degrees-of-Freedom Serial Robot with Integrated Topology and Dimensional Parameters.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We performed robotic neck surgery through a transoral or retroauricular approach (RA) using the DaVinci SP and analyzed our experiences to evaluate the feasibility and safety of this system for performing RA neck surgeries. A total of 63 patients were enrolled in this study, consisting of 37 males and 26 females. All operations were successfully completed without significant complication in 63 patients with head and neck tumor. Using DaVinci SP, it is easy to insert three robotic arms into a long and narrow working space because all robotic arms and an endoscope are inserted through a single arm. Using the navigation function of the DaVinci SP, the endoscopic arm could be made into the shape of a "cobra" to secure proper visualization of the surgical site, which helps surgeons identify specific anatomic structures such as cranial nerve or vessels. We did not have any cases where robotic surgery was converted to open surgery due to severe bleeding or technical issues during surgery. The mean operative time was 207 min and the average hospital stay was 6.9 days. The time required for docking the surgical robot was within 10 min on average for DaVinci SP, which was much simpler and faster than that of the previous Si/Xi system. Based on our early experiences performing robotic head and neck surgery using the DaVinci SP, we confirmed that the system provided advanced technical advantages over the previous Si/Xi system in performing robotic surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.